SWAZILAND: 'REWRITE CONSTITUTION'

Swaziland should look again at its constitution, this time ensuring that there is full consultation with the people, civic society and political organisations.

This s a major recommendation from the Commonwealth Expert Team (CET) members that were official observers of the elections in Swaziland in September.

The CET said that the elections were not entirely credible because the constitution banned political parties and members of parliament had few real powers.

In its report on the election, just published, the CET says revisiting the constitution is necessary to ‘ensure that Swaziland’s commitment to political pluralism is unequivocal’.

It says that review of the constitution ‘should be carried out through a process of full consultation with Swazi political organisations and civil society (possibly with the support of constitutional experts).’

The CET went on to say that the election was not credible, even though a new constitution has been introduced in Swaziland since the last election in 2003.

The CET states, ‘Swaziland has now adopted a new Constitution, which affords the nation an opportunity to make democratic progress. The real challenge is to gain the confidence of the democratic dispensation with an entrenched bill of rights, as is expected of Swaziland in accordance with Commonwealth principles and declarations.’

It added, ‘We also noted our serious concerns on the inherent inconsistencies and contradictions, particularly as they relate to the separation of powers (or lack thereof) and the rule of law. We also expressed our deep concern for the inconsistency and contradictions as they relate to the interpretation of the fundamental right of freedom of association and assembly, where political parties are denied formal recognition, so that they do not have the right to carry out activities which political parties would normally conduct in a multi-party democracy.

‘We believe that the Monarchy and a multi-party democracy are not mutually exclusive, and that a mechanism should be found to insulate the Monarchy from the turbulence of politics.

It goes on, ‘In the modern world, which is complex and constantly evolving, a multi-party democratic system has proved to be the best one for accommodating diversity and well-treasured norms in society. Practical experience has shown that institutions which have been marginalised have suffered. Confidence in the institutional framework to promote a vibrant electorate is vital, as a conscientious, well informed electorate is critical in this day and age. In any country the prevailing political environment influences all aspects of life including social and economic conditions for its citizens. One of the major areas it affects is the constitutional and legislative framework governing electoral processes.’

According to a report from the South Africa Broadcasting Corporation, the Swazi government has declined to comment on the report until it has had a chance to study it fully.

This is a standard response from the Swazi ruling elite to any criticism it receives from the international community. In practice, the government never responds (think of all those criticisms earlier this year and last about the poor governance in Swaziland).

The government thinks it can ignore these findings. It can’t. It is up to democrats to keep pushing the point that Swaziland’s ‘unique’ democracy stands condemned and it must change.

To read the full CET report click here.

See also

ELECTIONS

CAN’T TRUST SWAZIS TO RULE SELVES

Swazi people are not mature enough to be trusted with running the kingdom.

And that’s why Swaziland doesn’t need political parties and why it is important to have the king in charge.

These were the words of Prince Logcogco Mangaliso, the newly-appointed chair of Swazi National Council Standing Committee (SNCSC), otherwise known as Liqoqo

Liqoqo is the board that ‘advises’ and it is claimed influences the thinking and attitude of King Mswati III.

Keen readers will note that the chair is a member of the Swazi Royal Family and therefore implacably opposed to democracy.

In a lengthy interview in the Swazi Observer (1 November 2008), the newspaper that is in effect owned by the king, Prince Logcogco Mangaliso said that the new Swazi constitution did not curtail the powers of the monarchy. According to the Weekend Observer he said, ‘every facet of running the country involves or touches upon the institution of the Monarch’.

‘“It is the same even in Republics, where powers are vested in the President.

‘“At anytime, there is one person who has to have authority,” he said.

‘The chairman rules the country using his own prerogative.

‘“Our people are not mature to be entrusted with the running of the country.”’

The Weekend Observer added, ‘Prince Logcogco Mangaliso said anyone who says the King’s powers have been curtailed does not understand the Constitution.’

On the subject of political parties which have been banned in Swaziland since 1973, the prince said Swazi people didn’t want them. This is a statement that is often repeated by enemies of democracy in Swaziland but there is no proof. Put simply: nobody has ever asked the people.

In his interview, Prince Logcogco Mangaliso said, ‘We discovered that a majority of Swazis didn’t have sufficient knowledge on political parties.’ This is hardly surprising since nearly all avenues of political debate are controlled by the state and the state is vehemently opposed to political parties because they in effect threaten the power of the ruling elites.

It is noteworthy that this interview was published in the same week that the Commonwealth Expert Team that observed Swaziland’s September 2008 elections called for a rewrite of the Swazi constitution, and urged that civic society and political parties be part of the process.

Nobody outside of Swaziland buys the view that Swazis cannot make up their own minds on how they want to be governed.

See also

SWAZILAND: REWRITE CONSTITUTION

MPs BAR SWAZI REPORTERS

Here’s more evidence that journalists will not get an easy ride under the new Swaziland Prime Minister, Barnabas Dlamini.

Last week I wrote that Dlamini refused to answer questions from journalists after he announced the names of the members of King Mswati III’s new cabinet, The Times of Swaziland editor Martin Dlamini also wrote about how Dlamini liked to control the work of journalists the last time he was Prime Minister from 1996 – 2203.

Now comes news that on Wednesday (29 October 2008) Swazi journalists were kicked out of a meeting in which the newly-elected and appointed Members of Parliament discussed their pay. The journalists had been allowed to cover the earlier discussions, but when the legislators began to discuss their pay, the media was shown the door.

The Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) reported last week (31 October 2008) that the Clerk at Table, Ndvuna Dlamini, who was chairing the proceedings, told the journalists that they would not be allowed to cover the part in which the parliamentarians would be discussing their salaries. The journalists were then asked to leave the meeting.

The meeting had been called to orient the new parliamentarians about parliament procedures and code of conduct. The 95 MPs and senators are each expected to receive in excess of E25,000 (about 3,000 US dollars) per month in salaries, excluding sitting allowances.

The MISA Swaziland chapter views the expulsion of the journalists from the MPs’ meeting as ‘a serious violation of the public’s right to know and freedom of the press’.

MISA says, ‘The MPs will be paid from the public purse and the public had a right to know on how much the MPs would be getting from the public funds. Therefore, the action to expel journalists from such a session was uncalled for.’

Evidence from his previous time in office tells us that the new Prime Minister has no respect for the rule of law. This time around he has already said that he is out to get the ‘terrorists’ and those who support them.

We should read from this that he doesn’t trust anyone who disagrees with him. The media in Swaziland are in for a tough time.

See also

BARNABAS DLAMINI

KING TOLD: ‘APOLOGISE TO SWAZIS’

Last month (October 2008) while introducing Barnabas Dlamini (the man he had illegally chosen to be Swaziland’s new Prime Minister) King Mswati III, spoke emotionally about how ‘terrorists’ were threatening the kingdom. He gave Dlamini the mandate to get the terrorists and all who support them.

The king also made open criticisms of neighbouring South Africa for, he said, encouraging the terrorism.

Some of the Swaziland media (especially the print media) commented on this at the time and wondered why the king had lost his temper. As is the way of the media in Swaziland, they then blamed it all on the king’s ‘advisors’ (whoever they may be).

All this background is by way of introducing a reader’s letter to the editor that was published in the Times of Swaziland yesterday (31 October 2008). The reader is not as mealy-mouthed as the journalists. The reader puts the blame squarely on King Mswati III and says what the king said was ‘shameful’.

The reader publicly questions the king, ‘How can you talk this way in front of your people?
‘How can you tell your people to be ready for blood?

‘As a king, we expect him to be a symbol of peace and of unity but what I heard at Sibaya was just shameful.’

The letter writer goes on, ‘The king declared war, his traditional warriors are ready and again his uniformed forces are ready too.

‘They are ready to fight whom?

‘It’s surprising that they are ready to fight his people.

‘Instead of the king to handle the situation, he worsens it.’

It is dangerous to make open criticism of t he king in Swaziland, so it is no surprise that the writer signs himself (herself?): ‘A broken heart, Pigg’s Peak’.

The letter writer concludes, ‘It is again high time the king declares the government to the people not for himself and his family.

‘God created this world for us all and Swaziland is for us all. It can be for a certain clan if we are only threatened.

‘Your Majesty it is wisdom to apologise to our people and just for once to show them that you are also human, only God is perfect. In one of your birthday celebrations you asked for a gift of peace but all of a sudden you are ready for blood. You can change your decision and stage a government which is going to meet the people’s needs not the ‘Makhundu’ government we are all eagerly waiting to see whom it will first kill.’

To read the full letter click here.

P.S. Readers may like to know that the Times has reinstated its ‘comments’ facility on its website so that people may react to the reports.

SWAZI COPS FIRE LIVE BULLETS AT KIDS

Swazi police have fired live bullets at schoolchildren protestors.

They also fired rubber bullets and teargas.

It happened as about 700 pupils are said to have been demonstrating against their school’s deputy principal.

The incident happened on Tuesday (28 October 2008) at Nhlangano Central High School when the pupils attacked the deputy principal, who has been accused of engaging in witchcraft at the school.

The Swazi Observer reported on Wednesday (29 October 2008) that police arrived at the school ‘and fired shots to scare the pupils away, restoring order’.

The Observer continued, ‘Police Public Relations Officer Superintendent Vusi Masuku confirmed that police used live rounds but said it was necessary to disperse the rioting pupils.

‘He said the police had initially used teargas but the pupils refused to budge.’

Yesterday’s Times of Swaziland had a different version of events. It reports that some people had claimed that only rubber bullets were fired, ‘but the pictures captured by our photographer suggest rubber had very little to do with the cartridges found on the ground’.

The police in Swaziland are ill disciplined and out of control. They regularly use excessive methods, such as firing teargas and rubber bullets, to disperse crowds – even, as in the case of striking textile workers earlier this year – people who are lawfully going about their business.

The firing by police on children is disgraceful. The fact that they fired live bullets should be condemned. It shows us just how quickly the state is prepared to unleash violence against its own people.

I hope the international community condemns this action. Those of us with long memories will remember that in apartheid South Africa the tide of international opinion turned against the ruling elite once it started shooting and killing schoolkids.

Let’s hope it doesn’t come to that in Swaziland.

MORE CRITICS OF SWAZI ELECTIONS

Another of the official observer groups to last month’s elections in Swaziland has criticised the lack of democracy in the kingdom.

Political parties remain banned in Swaziland since 1973 and the parliament that is elected has few powers. King Mswati III makes all the important decisions and none of the members of the Swazi senate are elected by the people.

The Commonwealth Expert Team (CET) in a media release issued on Wednesday (29 October 2008) said there were weaknesses in Swaziland’s constitutional, legal and electoral framework. The CET said these weaknesses ‘required reforms through a process of consultation and dialogue’.

Commonwealth Secretary-General Kamalesh Sharma said, ‘What is vital now is for the Government and all political and civil society organizations in Swaziland to work together to chart a mutually agreed path for the future development of the country, with a view to ensuring its sustainable growth and stability, in line with Commonwealth fundamental values.’

The CET is not the only official election observer group to call for greater democracy in Swaziland. The Pan-African Parliament mission had previously reported, ‘The non-participation of political parties makes these elections extraordinary from any others but we hope with time things will change.’

The Southern African Development Community (SADC) observers recommended improvements to the electoral system in the future.

The latest report from the CET shows that despite Swaziland’s new constitution that came into effect in 2006 not much has changed in Swaziland. After the previous election in 2003 CET reported, ‘... we do not regard the credibility of these National elections as an issue: no elections can be credible when they are for a Parliament which does not have power and when political parties are banned’.

All observer groups have urged Swaziland to rethink its political process, which is ‘diplomat speak’ for ‘become a democracy’. They were saying such things after the 2003 election and they are saying them again now.

The fact that nothing has changed tells us all we need to know about the commitment of Swaziland’s ruling elite to democracy. The elite despise its own Swazi people and ignore the views of the international community.

With the illegal appointment earlier this month of new Prime Minister Barnabas Dlamini it is clear that the king and his supporters have no respect for the Swazi constitution. We now are told by the king that Dlamini must get the ‘terrorists’ and all who support them (for that read ‘democrats’).

Now the elections are over and the eyes of the international community are elsewhere, we can expect more repression in Swaziland in the coming months.

See also

ELECTIONS

SWAZILAND ELECTIONS 2008 BLOGSITE